Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of claims
Claims 13-15 have been cancelled; Claims 4-6, 16-18, and 22 are withdrawn as non-elected claims; Claim 23 is added as new claim; Claims 1-3, 7-12, 19-21, and 23 remain for examination, wherein claim 1 is an independent claim. there is no amendment since last office action dated 2/24/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
IDS filed on 2/26/2026 has been recorded.
Previous Claim Objections/Rejections
Previous rejection of Claim 23 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG’768 in view of WO’026 and further in view of Zhang et al (CN 111842411 A, with on-line translation, thereafter CN’411) in view of the Applicant’s “Arguments/Remarks” filed on 5/18/2026.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 23 incudes allowable subject matter.
Claim 23 is still objected to as depending from rejected independent claim(s), but would be allowed if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims since it is noted that the recorded prior art(s) does not specify the claimed water removing to cause crystallization of the ammonium sulphate as claimed in the instant claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 7, 9-12, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito al (US-PG-pub 2019/0106768 A1, thereafter PG’768) in view of Jones et al (WO-9641026 A1, thereafter WO’026).
PG’768 in view of WO’026 is applied to the instant claims 1-3, 7, 9-12, and 19-21 for the same reason as stated in the previous office action dated 2/24/2026.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG’768 in view of WO’026 and further in view of Johnson et al (US-PG-pub 2017/0233848 A1, thereafter PG’848).
PG’768 in view of WO’026 and PG’848 is applied to the instant claim 8 for the same reason as stated in the previous office action dated 2/24/2026.
Notes: Bourass et al (US-PG-pub 2017/0342573 A1) is cited as a reference only.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments to the art rejection to Claims 1-3, 7-12, and 19-21 have been considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant’s arguments have been summarized as following:
The obviousness rejection should be withdrawn because the combination does not yield the claimed invention because neither reference discloses removal of ammonium sulfate after the extraction of lithium. Neither PG'768 nor WO'026 disclose the removal of ammonium sulfate after the extraction of Li
In response,
Regarding the argument, PG’768 specify adding ammonia to the first separated solution. WO’026 indicates that treating the raffinate to recover ammonium sulphate after Ni/Co leaching (Page 44, lins.26-31 of WO’026). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply the well-known technique, that is applying an ammonium sulphate recovery step, as demonstrated by WO’026 in the process of PG’768 in order to build up in the circle (Page 44, lins.26-31 of WO’026). PG'768 teaches leaching feed stream including Li, Co, and Ni and metal recovering (Fig.1 and examples of PG'768) and WO’026 indicates that treating the raffinate to recover ammonium sulphate after Ni/Co leaching (Page 44, lins.26-31 of WO’026). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply ammonium sulphate removing after Li extraction.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIE YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1884. The examiner can normally be reached on IFP.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan J Johnson can be reached on 571-272-1177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JIE YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights